nfitz
Superstar
Sure you can do anything for a price.
But if there was any intention to do so in the next quarter century then they'd have put in wider structures during the recent rebuild and expansion.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
But if there was any intention to do so in the next quarter century then they'd have put in wider structures during the recent rebuild and expansion.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
“People are wasting hours commuting.” Pardon my French but no shit? Living 80KM away is going to entail thatPeople of Bradford want to see express trains on the Barrie line.
Petition pushes for express Bradford-Union Station GO train
‘Bradford is one of the fastest-growing towns in Ontario, but our transit options remain stuck in slow motion,’ says organizerwww.barrietoday.com
Bojaxs
Senior Member
I could have sworn some people in this thread were saying that express was possible on the Barrie line due to some stretches of the line being triple track. Particularly through Rutherford GO.
crs1026
Superstar
Triple track has been spaced in for segments of the Barrie line, yes. That would permit a certain amount of unidirectional peak express service. But, how much time that saves will depend on the headways planned. Much more express track would be needed to extend express service beyond about King City. And, as noted, the section south of Concord does not have the width to add an express track.
- Paul
- Paul
smallspy
Senior Member
There are several sections of triple track being roughed in during the current corridor expansion project.
Rutherford, Maple and Downsview Park stations are already set up for triple track, and Caledonia's EA has allowed room for 3 tracks through there. That said, there will be a section of double track from Steeles to Highway 7, and it will be double track to the south.
Dan
nfitz
Superstar
That's good to know - I was unaware of that. Is there any on Stouffville (at least north of the Lakeshore)?
Though I'd think Downsview Park would not be a station you'd skip, given the subway connection and proximity to York U.
Hard to keep track of so many projects - I don't know how you do it.
nfitz
Superstar
The new GO schedules for all the Niagara trains stopping at West Harbour are out - https://www.gotransit.com/en/see-schedules/pdf-schedules (along with some very minor tweaks on the Richmond Hill and Stouffville lines by a minute or so on some runs).
The time savings for the current run that already stops at West Harbour is a whopping 8 minutes on the AM run and 7 minutes on the PM reverse run. Somehow I thought it would be more. Meanwhile the West Harbour stop has (not surprisingly) added another 2 minutes for the trains that didn't stop there westbound to Niagara ... and an amazing 4-5 minutes eastbound (and on some weekend runs).
Bizarre. After decades of virtually no changes in the schedules, Lakeshore run times have been gradually getting longer over the last decade or so, with frequent schedule changes. At the rate they are going, electrification will only get them back to the run times that worked well for about a half-century starting in the 1960s.
The time savings for the current run that already stops at West Harbour is a whopping 8 minutes on the AM run and 7 minutes on the PM reverse run. Somehow I thought it would be more. Meanwhile the West Harbour stop has (not surprisingly) added another 2 minutes for the trains that didn't stop there westbound to Niagara ... and an amazing 4-5 minutes eastbound (and on some weekend runs).
Bizarre. After decades of virtually no changes in the schedules, Lakeshore run times have been gradually getting longer over the last decade or so, with frequent schedule changes. At the rate they are going, electrification will only get them back to the run times that worked well for about a half-century starting in the 1960s.
smallspy
Senior Member
The vast, vast majority of the Stouffville corridor is too narrow to allow for a third track.
Dan
TwoWheelPoli
Active Member
One thing that's really needed on parts of the GO corridors is parallel bike paths. Especially between East Gwillimbury / Holland Landing and Barrie's Allandale Waterfront station and the former York-Durham tracks from Uxbridge to Stouffville's Old Elm station (and maybe parts of the Stouffville line). Would help fill some of the gaps between rail trails.
In some cases such as the now-defunct Orangeville Brampton Railway, why not accommodate both a new GO line to Orangeville and a rail trail as opposed to the current proposal to convert the tracks to a rail trail?
In some cases such as the now-defunct Orangeville Brampton Railway, why not accommodate both a new GO line to Orangeville and a rail trail as opposed to the current proposal to convert the tracks to a rail trail?
crs1026
Superstar
I certainly don't oppose the idea where it's feasible, but realistically there are many places where the topography doesn't allow it (curves, embankments, cuts, culverts) such that the cost of carving out a bike path - with safe clearances and separation/fencing - is prohibitive. And there's the old problem of continuity - a right of way may be amenable for a stretch, but then there's a creek to overcome or an overpass that's in the way - and that becomes a showstopper for the whole corridor. It only works if one can construct end to end without undue detours or missing sections.
Really, just using the entire corridor width for tracks is often all that's possible.
- Paul
Garuda
Active Member
"Oh God I'm choking on irony!"
Years ago (pre pandemic) I worked with someone who commuted from Barrie to 400/401 everyday. He was in bed by 9pm and up at 4:30am every weekday morning. Like, how do you enjoy a work/life balance doing that?
Bojaxs
Senior Member
There are guys at the CN Brampton yard who commut daily from Barrie, Wasaga Beach, Dundurn, Niagara Falls, etc.
The long commutes force them to work night shifts so they can avoid the traffic.
When a snow storm hits, they usually have to book a room at the nearby hotel or just not show up for work.
lenaitch
Senior Member
In addition to the limitations Paul outlines, at who's cost? It might be one thing when MX is doing ROW/roadbed work anyway (absent the issues of culverts, bridges, etc.) but, even at that, does MX bear the cost of extra site planning, grading, aggregate, fencing, etc. For the railbanked portion of the Uxbridge Sub, MX spends not a dime on it; why should for no benefit to them. As for Orangeville, it seems MX had no interest in it. Given the alignment, I'm not surprised.
I've often wondered about the liability for the property owner and/or operators by allowing bikes and pedestrian in close proximity; maybe it's a non-issue. I also often wondered why, if I was a cyclist or pedestrian, how much I'd like to be in the air blast of a train running at any kind of speed.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
TBH Even in the 2000's when it seemed more doable it sounded crazy to me. I think some people wanted a big house for their family and either couldn't move or was close enough to retiring to suffer through it for a few more years, but yeah it the mother of all irony!
crs1026
Superstar
ML’s whole strategy of building sound walls would have to reverse itself if bike lanes were squeezed into their corridors. Too much money invested already.
And….. next time you are riding a GO train, and imagining how a bike trail might be fitted into the space between existing tracks and the fenceline… have a look at how much of that space is related to drainage. Water is enemy number one for a trackbed. Where ML is adding tracks, the amount of work required to adjust from natural slopes and ditches to more engineered runoff systems is substantial. It can be done…. But that consideration alone will make a bike path very, very expensive.
- Paul